Any ideas on a haven?
GDon – I love this stuff, but unfortunately I think we’re WAY past the constitution being able to save us. it hasn’t been followed for 95 years. state governments are nothing now but administrative localities for the national empire government. can you name 1 governor who even understands what the militia really is, let alone 1 who would step up to the plate and lead it appropriately like the Constitution demands? and when it comes to citizens, most people are passive subjects, not armed citizens, and they’ve been programmed to think any citizen with a weapon is a would-be "terrorist." I guarantee they’d call 911 if they saw somebody riding down the road with an exposed rifle like men do in Switzerland.
I’m an ex-military officer. the oath is not really followed. the military has become a tool for the executive branch to pursue its agenda. the phrase "foreign and domestic" hasn’t applied for a long time. they don’t know what domestic enemy is. if it were followed, the military would march on the Federal Reserve building and shut it down and demand the government put a real currency in place. military officers are programmed to be completely passive, not allowed to have an opinion, required to follow any/all directives from civilian leadership. they engaged in domestic law enforcement under Clinton. they’ll do so again. the Army War College is intensively studying how to institute martial law. some officers consider citizens to be threats as Delta Force has been fighting citizens in raids in Texas, fighting the staged protest in Seattle, advising how to attack the Waco compound, etc, etc. I’m willing to bet some black ops units have been corrupted since Clinton. any secret organization is in danger of that…the CIA and NSA can easily turn against citizens as well. they got the right officers in place who are willing to serve as the praetorian guard for a corrupt president. do you happen to know about the survey sent by the Clinton administration to Marine officers and some special units that asked if they’d be willing to engage citizens with force is ordered to do so? the answers to those surveys were filed I guarantee for future use. that’s all it takes to corrupt law enforcement or military…find the right leaders who will be willing to collude with a tyrant and "game over!" that’s what Clinton did in Arkansas…the state police were his praetorian guard. that’s how the city of Chicago operates…basically a mafia organization. it’s not hard to corrupt our once venerable institutions like the military. over the last 15 years, there has been a quiet purge of the older leadership, so younger "hooah" types are more prevalent in the Marines, black ops, etc. that alone is extremely destabilizing. plus, the good old leaders will be sent to run wars around the world, while the corruptible units and younger types will be kept stateside to oppress citizens. that’s how Hitler did it.
my only hope is that enough good citizen-minded military officers remain in place. I’m pretty sure the conventional army has enough good leadership that it would stop itself before escalating to domestic warfare. But all it takes is a few well-placed folks in units like black ops to keep the conventional army in check. That’s how praetorian guards operate. That’s how Saddam kept his army from killing him. That’s how Hitler kept the incredibly professional German army from interfering with his domestic terrorism.
also, I don’t really agree with this. first, I think state police are already extensions of the Feds…they aren’t connected to local community…they are the jackboots and have been increasingly militarized for 15 years or so. when it comes to towns/counties, are you aware of what Delta Force did in Texas in the 90’s as they went around looking for towns/counties that would go along with Federal control? a couple good police chiefs and sheriffs refused, but most of the officials went along with it. and that’s Texas! I imagine it would 100% compliance anywhere east of the Mississippi River except in the Old South.
[quote=GDon]Instead, most State Troopers, County Sheriffs, and Municipal Police might, under TSHTF conditions, consider themselves "local" citizens first, and jackboots of the Federalized police second.[/quote]
Oops…. typo. Dashed that off in a hurry and the "not" certainly does not belong in my comment about the problem of peak oil.
The "Power of the Purse" and the "Power of the Sword", have indeed, been largely handed-over to opponents of individual liberty, and this started long before 1913.
However, minus the tattered parchment on which America’s laws and philosophy were founded – i.e., the Constitution, there is nothing else which powers the light of freedom from tyranny, and nothing to turn to "to make the legal case" for liberty.
Maybe it’s unlucky for would-be despots, that Americans at least "think" that they are free, and perhaps, just perhaps, in some future event that they no longer "believe" this, they may awaken to just how far their liberties have sunk.
No doubt – tyrants, usurpers and despots have been working on securing for their own engrandisement, the Purse and the Sword of America for generations.
All the same, convincing those already holding "the ultimate power" (as Mao would say) – i.e., the men and women already working in city, county, state and federal "policing" jurisdictions, is the only feasible disruption to the probability of future domestic tyranny.
You may be aware, that over 9 States have entered bills into their state legislatures over the last month or so, reconfirming the 9th & 10th Amendments – i.e., that the Federal government does not have jurisdiction outside of it’s original prescription. While not having much teeth, I’m frankly awestruck that this has even happened (Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Washington and Pennsylvania). Up to 20 more states are formulating similar legislation.
True – maybe it’s all for naught. But communication and information are the only seeds left in the bag.
[quote=Treah]About 20 years ago, my husband & I investigated bothNew Zealand & Sweden as countries to resettle in (also Canada in
more recent years). In all cases, we would NOT be excepted as potential
citizens unless we had a six-figure assets & were under a certain
age, were married, etc. Probably restrictions are more stringent
So my take on all this is most countries DON’T WANT US! I agree
with ckessel….participate in a local community. That is the best
security you can create.[/quote]
You are quite right about the
stringent requirements of emigration destinations such as New Zealand,
Canada, and most other rich countries. Generally they are looking
either for a multi-million-dollar job-creating investment, or skilled
people who still have a good part of their working career ahead.
But on the contrary, most Central
and South American countries offer pension visas. This means that if
you can demonstrate a secure source of income — which might be Social
Security, an employer pension or IRA/Keogh, an annuity, or even a
securities account stuffed with T-notes, you can qualify for a
pensioner visa. The required monthly income ranges from as low as $500
up to $3,000 or so, depending on the country. Last time I checked,
Brazil was on the high end of the range, somewhere around $2,500 a
This is another reason to take a look around in Latin
America. Unlike the rich world, most Latin countries DO welcome
immigrants who bring money into the country, and don’t need to work.
Costa Rica, Panama, Brazil and Argentina are specific examples, but
there are plenty of others.
Interesting that NZ is brought up here many times. Aren’t you afraid its export-dependent economy might go down too? Also, anyone has any thoughts about places like Portugal and Chile?
This has been a recurrent topic in our home (my wife and I discussed it again yesterday afternoon), much to this displeasure, or at least, confusion, of our three sons. Whether to stay in the United States, or leave, and if we leave, what destination would be a better choice?
The fact that this topic keeps coming up means that we, obviously, haven’t found our answer. But, I’ll share with you our thought process, thus far.
Our reasons for considering leaving, like others, is partly out of concern for physical and fiscal safety, to include a major concern for the long term well-being of our children, but I have to admit that there is a certain self-indulgent escapism involved; the romance of a new and potentially more "exotic" locale. Sipping a Corona on the beach may not be the best reason, but I understand the motivation.
Our reasons for staying in the United States include familiarity, closeness to family and friends, and an admittedly strained allegiance to my fellow citizens. If ever there was a time for good leadership, commonality of purpose, and closeness of community, this is it. It is an exciting time, albeit a scary one, and I don’t yet know whether or not we want to be as active a part of the needed change.
While we haven’t made a decision, our leading contenders for places to potentially relocate are New Zealand and Canada. We also toy with Hawaii repeatedly (specifically, the Big Island), as my wife and I have both lived there, and still have friends there. New Zealand and Canada are both attractive for the same reasons others have mentioned, so I will not repeat those. New Zealand is a long way from family, so that is its principle drawback. Canada, and in particular, British Columbia, is probably our current favored "escape plan". Some of the South America countries are also appealing, although I would have to drastically improve upon my two years of college Spanish. I have participated in medical missions in Bolivia, and have friends there, but the political environment and burgeoning civil unrest is concerning.
As a physician, I have a skill set that is appealing to most countries (Costa Rica, however, will not accept physicians who want to actively practice, not wanting them to displace native physicians), so our options are not as limited as they might be for some others. Still, I will be needed here, also. Tough choice. In the end, I suspect we’ll stay in Iowa.
Nime, I do like Chile. Beautiful country, nice people, great wine! I don’t know much about their political or economic condition, but it would be a country I would check into further, if we got serious about actually making a move.
Why not stay and fight to get our country back?
We don’t have to concede – we can still win. What do I mean by winning?
– Eliminate the Non-federal Reserve Bank – prosecute them under RICO laws and sieze all of their assets.
– Terminate all debt that they are owed.
– Impeach and prosecute all politicians who usurped our Constitution.
Imagine the freedom and prosperity that would be gained by throwing out the central bankers. According to Benjamin Franklin, this was the very reason for fighting our great war of independence. Having usurped British Parliament, "the Bank of England" required the
American colonists to adopt a currency subject to as much as 30 percent
annual interest. Franklin explained the
principal cause of the American Revolution:
"We would have gladly borne the little tax on tea
and other matters, had it not been that they took from us our money,
which created great unemployment and dissatisfaction. Within a year,
the poor houses were filled. The hungry and homeless walked the streets
Our job is a lot easier than it was back in Franklin’s day. The next American revolution will really be an awakening of the people – an understanding that we create prosperity and that freedom can only be granted by mutual consent. And an understanding that we have been duped by a corrupt and parasitic system that has usurped our government.
Anything worth keeping is worth fighting for.
America is my home, for better or for worse, and her fate is my own.
Not trying to sound all Star-Warsy and pseudo-philosophical, but the soul of this country is overdue for re-emergence, and if we flee, how long will it be until our perceived sanctuary falls to the same or similar fate?
I won’t run. This is my home – and it does not belong to the banksters.